When a prime minister's press secretary on his own initiative calls newspapers and television channels to tell them that he is neither confirming nor denying the prime minister's resignation, the inference is that there is something wrong somewhere. This is exactly the exercise which Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's Press Secretary Sanjay Baru went over some time ago. The entire country was ablaze with rumours and the share market was adversely affected.
There is no doubt that Singh has put all his weight behind the Indo-US nuclear deal, even to the reported exasperation of Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Congress Party. The Left is quite right when they say that Singh alone is bent upon going ahead with the deal.
What surprises me is the abrupt change in the prime minister from his earlier observations: his government is not a one issue government; the failure to sign the deal is not the end of the world.
Till recently, whenever the co-ordination committee - comprising the Congress, its allies and the Left - met the spirit of accommodation was so perceptible that all felt a way would be found to reach a consensus.
The Left, which threatened to withdraw its support from the government if it made any move towards the deal, allowed the government to have talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on the safeguards agreement. They feel let down.
Now they have said that Singh's departure to Tokyo to attend the Group of Eight (G8) meeting will be considered the government's decision to go ahead with the deal. So why has the prime minister taken such a tough stance?
The suspicion is that President George W. Bush's pressure, or for that matter America's, has worked. I do not buy it because Singh is not the person who would give in without believing that what he is doing is right. He may be honestly of the viewpoint that the deal is the best thing that will happen to the country. Indian civil society by and large thinks in a similar way.
Probably, the prime minister believes that it is a historic moment for him to quit, if need be. He will leave in blazing glory, giving the impression that when it came to the country's "interests", he sacrificed his office. The never-stopping taunt by the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that Singh is a weak prime minister may also have spurred him to go ahead to prove that he is not.
Correct
I don't know if his stand is correct. One, his party is not with him if the deal means a parting of ways with the Left and facing early elections. The Congress and its allies fall short of a majority if the 59 members of the Left withdraw their support. Two, nuclear experts, including P.K. Iyengar, a former director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, have said in a statement that the deal was not in the interest of India.
The nuclear experts have no axe to grind and they know what they are talking about. Three, the general impression is that the US is pushing India hard so that it becomes dependent on Washington and hitch our wagon with America's, thereby jettisoning India's policy of non-alignment.
The evidence of US pressure is visible in the statements that come from Washington. A US lawmaker, Gary Ackerman, has said this week: "I have very difficult time understanding why India continues to pursue a gas pipeline with Iran and Pakistan ..." Not long ago, US Ambassador to India, David Mulford, warned New Delhi not to vote for Iran on a crucial IAEA board meeting and India voted at his bidding.
I do not really understand the government's obsession with the deal. It has literally stopped the rest of the work. This is the time when all efforts should have been directed to stop inflation and price rise.
Instead, the Congress has given the BJP a propaganda point, which it will use during the elections, whenever they are held.
The Left is also oblivious to the danger the country would face once the secular forces are divided. It has made all efforts it could to stall the nuclear deal, but throwing out a secular government with the help of the BJP will give a deadly blow to progressive forces.
The Left has to realise that while stopping the nuclear deal is important, it is equally paramount not to allow the country to go into the hands of the Hindutva protagonists. It's a pity that a Communist Party of India (Marxist) representative played the communal card by warning Samajwadi Party, which may support the Congress, that the Muslims from the Samajwadi will go away if it signs the deal which will be seen as a pro-American stand.
The latest statement by Singh should have mollified the Left. He has said that when New Delhi completes the process of negotiations with the IAEA and Nuclear Suppliers' Group, he will "bring it before the Parliament and abide by the House".
The only point to know is whether the deal has some confidential clauses or not. One thing which New Delhi has to guard against is America casting a shadow over India's sovereignty.
If, at some future date, India is obliged to carry out further nuclear tests to upgrade its capability, it shouldn't mean the Americans under the terms of this current deal would have the right to put their experts into India's nuclear plants like a force of international policemen.
True, the nuclear deal will open up many facilities in technology that developing India badly needs. But India cannot barter away its independence. It took Indians 150 years to get rid of the British. They should not land themselves in a situation where they remain sovereign on paper like the present-day Iraq, but actually be subservient to Washington's dictates.
The manner in which the US is putting pressure on New Delhi - literally installing officials in the government's different ministries - gives me jitters.
I must confess that a Manmohan Singh of South-South report, warning the Third World against the machinations of the developed countries, has changed over the years. I am not talking of his policy of globalisation, but of the pressure the World Bank and the multinational companies have come to wield during his regime.
The nuclear deal may open the floodgates for such cartels which stand to make billions of dollars from concessions that New Delhi would inevitably make. I wish Singh, a brilliant economist as he is, had burnt the midnight oil to devise policies which would have uplifted the lower 70 per cent of people who, according to an official report, live on one dollar a day.
Kuldip Nayar is a former Indian High Commissioner to the UK and a former Rajya Sabha MP.
